Roller v. Quintana
Petitioner: John Roller
Respondent: Francisco Quintana
Case Number: 1:2015cv00022
Filed: January 29, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
Office: Chattanooga Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: Susan K Lee
Presiding Judge: Harry S Mattice
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM OPINION.Petitioner will be ASSESSED the filing fee of $5.00 and this action will be DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b). Judgment Order will enter.Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on 2/13/2018. (SAC, )Copy mailed to Roller, FMC Lexington, Commissioner of the BOP, Court's financial deputy.
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Tennessee Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Roller v. Quintana
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: John Roller
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Francisco Quintana
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?